RUG.TOOLS
Clash$$clash
Risk analysis for Clash ($clash) on Ethereum — contract 0xaf62a3c44363ce474cf90200e54dd7cf28b65985. Covers liquidity, holder concentration, creator activity and available contract security signals, with unavailable checks shown as unavailable.
Scanned 2026-10-22 16:56 UTC
- 1.CRITICAL RED FLAG · Project Lifecycle
Liquidity or market activity has collapsed. Lifecycle evidence alone does not confirm deliberate liquidity removal.
Why it matters: Weakening activity or liquidity can impair exits; deterioration alone is not proof of deliberate fraud.
- 2.CRITICAL RED FLAG · Contract Security
Honeypot — buyers cannot sell.
Why it matters: Restrictions on selling directly affect whether holders can exit; verify the exact tested route and observation time.
- 3.Unclassified Contract Concentration
An unclassified contract holds 70.04% of supply. Its purpose and control remain unverified.
Why it matters: Review the underlying recorded evidence; this does not establish malicious intent.
See 3 additional recorded findings
- 4. Liquidity
Very thin liquidity ($83) — a trading risk (heavy slippage), not proof of a scam.
Why it matters: Limited available liquidity can make large trades expensive or difficult to exit; a market quote is not proof of LP protection.
- 5. Reported liquidity depth
$83.12 in tracked liquidity in the recorded market snapshot.
Why it matters: Trading depth affects slippage and exit difficulty. Market-reported liquidity does not establish a verified LP lock or current executable quote.
- 6. Top 10 individual wallet concentration
The reported top 10 individual wallets hold 29.82% of supply, using the report's holder classification and coverage.
Why it matters: Concentration can increase potential sell pressure. Wallet addresses do not establish distinct beneficial owners or independent control.
Reliability & unknowns
Low confidence describes evidence coverage, quality and freshness, not token safety. checks incomplete.
• Required verification checks are incomplete; category availability does not establish completed verification.
• The report evidence is stale or its observation time is invalid; confidence is limited.
LP protection: not verified. Wallet attribution and independent control require separate evidence.
Technical snapshot
Trading indicators and observed activity
Technical snapshot
Market structure, order flow and published on-chain evidence from one chain-specific snapshot.
Available depth relative to valuation
24h volume divided by liquidity
Transaction split unavailable
Across 1h, 6h and 24h returns
How to read these technicals
Turnover measures trading activity against available liquidity. High turnover can also mean volatility.
Momentum alignment compares overlapping return windows. It is context, not independent confirmation or a safety score.
Holder concentration uses the published report’s classified holder evidence when available.
Freshness is the age of Rug.Tools’ indexed market snapshot, separate from the report scan time.
Price chart
Price chart
Price chart
Load verified candle history to explore price and volume directly in this report.
Market overview
Market overview
Market data
Trading activity
Markets & liquidity pools
Markets & liquidity pools
Primary indexed pool
0x0d65faf891c0d7dfa3edb98611e5a24f5ff45f22The page opens from Rug.Tools’ indexed snapshot. Load the full pool list only when you need a live provider check.
What is Clash?
What is Clash?
Clash ($$clash) is a ERC-20 token on the Ethereum blockchain Its primary trading venue is uniswap_v2, with roughly $83.12 in live on-chain liquidity. It currently has 40 on-chain holders, and was first traded 3 months old. Rug.Tools' current assessment of Clash is "Rugged / Dead", based on live on-chain signals including holder concentration, liquidity depth, creator wallet history and contract permissions.
Rug.Tools signals
Rug.Tools signals
Key statistics
Key statistics
Launch activity
Native receipt, wallet and liquidity custody evidenceNative evidence explorer
Launch, wallet flows & liquidity custody
Inspect what was observed, which balances were measured, and what remains unverified. Timing and transfers alone do not establish common ownership or a sale.
Investigate creator trades & token transfers
Forensic intelligence / Activity
What did the developer actually do?
Separate current holdings, historical launch exposure, verified sales and token transfers. Follow the receipts before drawing conclusions.
- Creator holdings
- Unknown
- Historical launch exposure
- Unknown
Saved balance measurement; separate from sale history
Observed launch-group share of total token supply; not every graph node, developer sales or present insider ownership
Developer sales: Insufficient Evidence · Trading integrity: Not Scored. A creator holding 0% does not establish whether tokens were sold or transferred.
Launch evidence
0 stored cohort rows
Receipt-level replay was not stored for this snapshot.
Current cohort balances
Unknown
Recipient cohort not recorded
Custody coverage
1 custody accounts / markets
1 without verified protection
Token custody and LP withdrawal protection are separate checks.
Launch timeline & receipt references
This older snapshot contains a recipient cohort, not the full receipt timeline. Counts and timing describe only the stored sample. Exact interval supply figures and transaction references remain unknown until a bounded native replay records them.
Pool-by-pool custody & protection
Pool allocation not established · reported role / market
Market selection alone does not verify LP ownership, locks or the controller of this pool.
Measured wallet balances & transfer evidence
A measured zero balance does not prove a sale. Unknown balances are not zero. Only 0 stored sample rows are listed; aggregate coverage includes missing rows.
| Recipient | Current balance | First position | Receipt references |
|---|
Source snapshot: . This evidence explorer does not independently change the Rug.Tools verdict. Existing risk findings, verification gates and source timestamps remain authoritative.
RugGraph / Wallet intelligenceLinked-wallet graphNo wallet relationships were stored in this snapshot. Missing evidence does not establish safety.Open wallet graph ↓
01 / Launch activity
Select a wallet to see its activity near token launch. Early receipt of tokens alone does not prove a sniper purchase.
No saved wallet nodes or transaction links are available to plot. A new analysis may provide evidence; no connection is inferred.
Cyan: tokens received · Amber: tokens moved out · Dashed: deployment. Lines connect wallets to the launch sample; they do not identify who sent the tokens.
No stored wallet matches.
No wallet attribution available.
02 / Funding connections
Where did the funding come from?
Follow verified transfers back up to three wallets. Select any connected wallet to explore its evidence.
Evidence first. Ownership stays unproven.
A transfer proves funds moved between addresses. It does not prove they belong to the same person. Known exchange, bridge and pool accounts are marked as infrastructure.
How to read this evidence
Arrows show receipt references associated with the launch sample. They do not identify transfer counterparties or establish common ownership.
An early recipient is not necessarily a buyer or sniper. Outflows may be transfers; these summaries do not establish realized sales.
Balance measurements retain their original timestamps. Historical launch exposure is separate from present holdings.
Funding paths, verified swap activity and volume manipulation require additional transaction evidence. Missing history is unknown.
Source snapshot: 2026-10-22 16:56:16 UTC · Funding research runs only when requested.
Rug.Tools analysis
Rug.Tools analysis
The contract behaves like a honeypot — buyers cannot exit. Do not trade.
Verdict from canonical snapshot 2cd7a17e · v3 · scanned 2026-10-22 16:56 UTC · page content updated 2026-10-22 16:56 UTC
Holder distribution
Holder distribution
Token activity
Token activity
- 2026-07-15 15:05 UTCToken launchedFirst on-chain trading pair opened on uniswap_v2.
- 2026-10-22 16:56 UTCRug.Tools analyzed this tokenFresh on-chain snapshot captured.
Similar tokens
Similar tokens
Compared using stored market cap, launch age and trading venue. Similarity is not a safety rating.
Finding comparable tokens…
Learn more
Frequently asked questions
Frequently asked questions
What is Clash?⌄
Clash is a Ethereum token analyzed by Rug.Tools using public on-chain data — holders, liquidity, creator wallet activity and contract security signals. This page shows the latest cached analysis and refreshes automatically.
Is Clash safe?⌄
Current Rug.Tools verdict: Rugged / Dead. The contract behaves like a honeypot — buyers cannot exit. Do not trade. No token can be guaranteed safe: verdicts summarize on-chain risk signals only and cannot detect off-chain intent. Always do your own research.
How many holders does Clash have?⌄
Rug.Tools currently sees 40 holders. The largest holder account holds 16.17% of supply; the top 10 holder accounts together hold 29.82%. These balances alone do not establish individual ownership or independent control.
Where is Clash traded?⌄
The primary trading venue detected on Ethereum is uniswap_v2. Review the market and liquidity evidence below; trading venue availability does not establish token safety.
How often does this page update?⌄
This page renders from cached data in our database. It refreshes when a new scan runs — either on a scheduled background sync or when a user clicks Refresh above. Opening this page does not trigger a new scan.